From: henri dubois-ferriere <henridf@gmail.com>
To: Jon Harrop <postmaster@jdh30.plus.com>
Cc: Ocaml <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] lazy vs function for values that are used once at most
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 16:21:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d61254fb0406300721714b8eb@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200406301439.15289.postmaster@jdh30.plus.com>
ok.
actually, i should refine my question a little further:
in the vast majority of cases, the value is *not* used at all.
so i suppose the memoization overhead you mention does not occur when
a lazy value is not forced.
so, the question then becomes:
any difference in overhead between creating
(lazy v)
and
(fun () -> v)
?
thanks for any insights
henri
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 14:39:15 +0100, Jon Harrop
<postmaster@jdh30.plus.com> wrote:
>
> > when one has a value v that is going to be either used 0 or 1 time, is
> > there any difference in terms of overhead (ie for building the
> > closure, GC performance, etc) between passing around (lazy v) and
> > then forcing the value if needed, or passing around (fun () -> v) and
> > evaluating f when needed?
>
> IIRC, Lazy is slower because of the (wasted, in this case) overhead of
> memoizing the result.
>
> Cheers,
> Jon.
>
> -------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
>
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-30 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-30 13:31 henri dubois-ferriere
2004-06-30 13:39 ` Jon Harrop
2004-06-30 14:21 ` henri dubois-ferriere [this message]
2004-06-30 14:44 ` Frederic van der Plancke
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d61254fb0406300721714b8eb@mail.gmail.com \
--to=henridf@gmail.com \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=postmaster@jdh30.plus.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox